Only a few weeks after the still-birth of the association, a new
literary-political child was set on its feet which did not only prove its
viability but also caused the Spaniards some trouble even at its tender
age; this was the "La Solidaridad".

The first copy of the fortnightly periodical "Soli", as the newspaper
was soon affectionately called, was published on February 15,1889 in
Barcelona under the direction of the triumvirate of Graciano Lopez
Jaena, Marcelo H. del Pilar and Mariano Ponce. It was a modest
publication of the political refugees, whose editorial staff did all the
publication functions.

Shortly after the launching of the newspaper, del Pilar reported the
following: "We, finally, have a newspaper, democratic in its policy,
but even more democratic in its organization. You should see how
Graciano, as editor, writes, proof-reads, distributes copies and even
carries the packages to the post office; how Ponce collects the
contributions as manager, himself writes, proof-reads, collects and writes
addresses, dispatches the mail and delivers copies as well ..."

Many of the people working with the periodical were well-known
artists and scholars, whose names would later become known as
politicians and generals of the revolution, among them a Spaniard
too, the historian and former minister, Dr. Miguel Morayta.

The main article of the first copy of the "Soli" contains the objective
of the periodical: "Our aims are modest, very modest. Our program is
clear and simple: to fight against the reaction, to stop all reactionary
measures, to adopt and promote all liberal ideas, to uphold progress."

It should be the task of the "Solidaridad" to stimulate the awakening
of liberal ideas in all fields, be it politics, science, arts, literature,
trade, agriculture or industry. Thus, it was essential to devote the
greatest attention to the defense of the democratic rights of the
Philippines, in whatever aspects of her, that needs the greatest
assistance, since she is not represented in the Parliament; this is a
patriotic duty. "The nation of the Philippines, made up of eight
million souls, should not and must not remain the exclusive reservation
of theocracy and traditionalism," the main article concludes.

Subsequently, through the deafness of the Spaniards regarding all
attempts for reforms, this "modesty" cleared the way for a certain
radicalization expressed in the following article of Rizal which contains
an admonition to the Spaniards, of what the Filipinos would
reproach them with, if there were no progress: "Spain, you remained
deaf and arrogant, you proceeded with your false ways and accuse us
of being traitors just because we love our country, just because we tell
the truth and abhor injustice ... O, Spain! Must we tell the Philippines
one day, that you have no ear for her misfortune and that if she
wants to save herself, then she must do it herself?"

In the final analysis, the view of Rizal has shown the inflexibility of
the Spaniards which was responsible for the radicalization (and the
eventual loss of their colony) and which was exactly identical with
that of Blumentritt's. In the "Österreichische Monatsschrift für den
Orient" (Austrian Monthly journal for the Orient), Blumentritt gets
even with those Spanish groups which dread the secession of the
colony from the country, so that they, "blinded by racial arrogance
and national vanity not only by uncivilly denying the Filipinos of
their legitimate demands, but also by abusively ridiculing them,"
unfortunately worked with zeal at alienating the Filipinos from the
mother country.

And, as far as the refusal of a representation of the Philippines in
the Cortés is concerned, for the first time, Blumentritt sanctions the
idea of the revolution and full independence, as when he asserts: "If
this legitimate and sincere wish is not fulfilled, then the Filipinos
themselves will probably take the parliamentary representation for
themselves, that is, the way the Cubans exacted the same thing for
themselves, namely by means of an uprising or the way the American
mainland struggled for their independence."

In this publication, by giving information about the "Soli", which
was created because the censor in the Philippines made every public
treatment of national affairs impossible, Blumentritt proves to be,
above all, an important informant of the European public. "For this
reason, the leaders of the liberal movement of that island country
founded a fortnightly publication, 'La Solidaridad', which espouses
vigorously the rights of the oppressed." And, immediately after that,
he proudly adds that the campaign of this review has not been
unsuccessful.

That such was the case can be considered primarily as Blumentritt's
own success: his espousal of the Philippine cause, but above all, his
active contribution to the periodical effected a significant change in
the position which the "Soli" assumed in the political and literary
world of Madrid and Spain in those days. Through Blumentritt's
contribution to the journal, the publication, which previously was
regarded as subversive as well as anti-royalty and anti-church, at
least, by the monarchical and conservative groups, won some unexpected
respect and distinction.

Blumentritt's contribution caused embarrassment if not apprehension
in the royal court, in the Madrid government and the high
ranking clergy. It went beyond these groups' horizon and comprehension
that an internationally esteemed and respected scholar - a man to
whom the education of children has been entrusted in his
native country, whose monarchy is closely connected with Spain by
tradition; a man who was a devout Catholic - made a common cause
with a little band of "irresponsible rebels and conspirators" publicly
and unhesitatingly.

This circumstance only made the "Soli" a provocation to the colonial
power. It would be unimaginable that at that time - the 80's of
the past century - a somewhat similar publication of the Indians in
Great Britain or the Indochinese in France would become the object of
the attention of the London or the Paris government, let alone cause
for polemics or a counter attack.

Even in Spain, the reaction to the "Soli" came unexpectedly because
the interest of the Spanish public, if it concerned itself at all
with colonial matters, was aimed at the problem of Cuba or Puerto
Rico, at the danger of losing the remaining dominions in the American
continent, and not at the Philippines, which was far away and
about which hardly anything was known.

All the same, the "Soli" was considered important enough to
create, sometime in 1891, two years after its foundation, an official
counter-organ, which under the title "La Politica de España en Filipinas"
(The Politics of Spain in the Philippines) engaged in the defence
of the Spanish policy in the Philippines against the criticism and
attacks of the "Soli". Yet, the most difficult venture of the colonial
defenders was to find the right arguments against Blumentritt who
was not a Filipino, who could not be reproached with personal or
national interests. Thus, there was no other alternative but to make
Blumentritt appear ridiculous either through satire or, as it had
already been done before, to cast suspicion upon Blumentritt as an
agent of Bismarck, who wanted to prepare the way for the German
occupation of the Philippines.

Furthermore, it is worth mentioning, that Rizal in the polemics
against the conditions in his native country cited the tragedy of
Mayerling to illustrate a personal misfortune. When Rizal's
brother-in-law died of cholera in Calamba, the parish priest would not rest
until he had informed the Archbishop of Manila by telegram about
the death, referring to the circumstance that the deceased had never
gone to confession since his wedding. The senior shepherd of the
capital city, however, did not flinch from the joint liability of the
family of the ostracized Rizal and forbade a Christian burial for the
brother-in-law. He was not allowed burial at the town cemetery; his
body was buried hastily on a hill outside the town.

Rizal answers in the "Soli" with an article calling the priest ignorant
and a defrauder, since he could not possibly know when and where,
the deceased went to confession when he was alive, whether or not it
was outside of his place of residence. And at the end he cites the
suicide of the crown prince Rudolph and the Barones Vetsera: "An
adulterer who murders his mistress and then commits suicide is
buried not only in consecrated ground and earth, but over the scene
of the adultery, murder and suicide, a chapel is erected just because
the wrong-doer was of royal blood . . . but a good, respected man,
benefactor of the Church, himself a nephew of priests, educated by
priests, a patron of the poor and the unfortunate is buried hurriedly
in a field, only because he is, by chance, a brother-in-law of
Rizal ... " (Rizal, by the way, had a foreboding of the tragedy in
advance when two years before this incident, he depicted this similar
fate for the father of the hero of his novel.)

The launching of the "Soli" roused Rizal into enthusiasm. "Onward
with the magazine!", he writes from Paris to the editor-in-chief
Jaena and appealed to all not to make mistakes, to be dilligent, to
take care of the paper like a first-born child, to present neither
exaggerations nor untruths, not to copy others, to proceed honesbly
and justly. "We must show our enemies that morally and humanely,
we are worthier than them," Rizal orders in a friendly manner and
tells of the opinion in Parisian liberal and emigrant groups, according
to which the periodical is becoming better with every issue.

In a later letter to del Pilar, Rizal appraises the value of Blumentritt's
contribution: "The magazine is now gaining prominence ...
imagine the appearance of such names as Blumentritt ..., if our
countrymen see, that Rizal is no exception . . . there is nothing better
than the example ... our foes will be surprised ..."

The significance of Blumentritt's contribution to the "Soli" emerges
very clearly in the correspondence between the two friends. The
Spaniards simply cannot believe in Blumentritt's contribution and for
this reason constantly fabricate new arguments in order not to be
compelled to accept the fact: "Your articles in the 'Solidaridad' are
suddenly becoming better ... Many Filipinos still believe that you do
not exist; they ascribe your articles to me. And the best thing about it
is some Spaniards believe that you are just lending your name to
us ... they do not understand that a foreigner, a European, other
than a Spaniard, is supporting the Filipinos with love and
devotion ... for this reason, they are forced to think that I need the
surveillance of the friars and the Spaniards and must sign my name
with a borrowed name ... "

Blumentritt, on his part, is not content with his contribution: "I
regret very much that I cannot live in Madrid amidst the "Solidaridad",
he writes and apologizes, not having given a package with
several copies of the magazine to a friend, Dr. Schadenberg, who
requested them. Nevertheless, the copies were found with him, a
German, in Manila - copies of a publication strictly prohibited in the
Philippines - consequently this gave the propaganda lie a new twist,
which was, that Bismarck financed the "Soli".

The months and years of polemics and agitation in the columns of
the "Soli", without any tangible result, with no progress in the
anticipated reforms by the Spaniards, certainly made Rizal despondent.
In addition to this, there were the unavoidable differences,
personal wranglings and arguments about the relevant policy in the
little emigrant group. And where at the beginning, there was enthusiasm,
soon Rizal refuses to contribute: "You would like me to write
an article for the "Soli", unfortunately, I must confess that I have the
intention of no longer writing an article for the periodical. I could
have told you this earlier ... I agree completely with what you write.
Whatever Blumentritt and Rizal can do, Blumentritt can do
alone ..."

Of course, Blumentritt tried to encourage up Rizal again: "The
struggles of the "Solidaridad" are not futile. I would not draw such
optimistic views merely from my head. But some Spaniards, who, at
the beginning of the campaign, avoided me like I was a heretic, are
writing to me again. And they say they think I was right ... "

Rizal persists in his political resolutions: "For this reason, I believe
that the "Solidaridad" is no longer our battlefield. It is now a question
of a new battle. The battle (field) is no longer Madrid. Everything will
be lost time ... Yes, I do not want to hurt you anymore; I only want
to tell you that I have given up hope in Spain. Because of this I shall
not write anymore a word for the "Solidaridad". It seems to me that it
is useless ..."

But Blumentritt judges the situation in an entirely different manner:
"Perhaps my words were harsh and caustic, but my heart is soft
and good. I shall never leave my poor Philippines, I am not a
deserter. I cannot share your opinion about the 'La Solidaridad'
because the enemies themselves acknowledged the importance of the
'Solidaridad' by setting up the fortnightly magazine, whose task is to
fight against the former. We cannot expect a miracle from the
publication.

He says that what other nations succeeded in achieving in four
decades cannot be achieved in four years, even though everything
has been developing faster now at the end of the century. And
Blumentritt analyzes: "I reiterate: A political party needs an organ, a
newspaper, and the Filipinos have it and should not neglect it,
because it upholds the honor of the country and the native race. The
Filipino can attain nothing at all with the arms now, therefore we can
only fight with the plunra (pen). At best, we can express our personal
opinions through some pamphlets: In our time, only a newspaper can
evoke the right impression ... "

If one considers the significant role that the newspapers of the
revolutionaries in exile had played as an organizer, agitator,
mouthpiece and discussion platform, then Blumentritt's analysis - with no
relevant experience - was all the more remarkable.